threat-system changed?

[porkuspigus 2]

Hi!  i  was gold, but now im silver  ;  last time when i was silver, was in 2017.  Did  threat-system changed? i read some posts about  elo-based threat system... 

Edited October 8, 2019 by porkuspigus

[iRawwwN 282]

?_? If u constantly lose missions or get score lower than the average opp in ur mission you lose ELO therefore u lose threat

[porkuspigus 2]

since when did they changed to ELO-based threat system? since the last patch?

Edited October 8, 2019 by porkuspigus

[Goldtiger 133]

I'm not sure if the threat system changed since 2017, since I wasn't able to play the game at the year, but as far as I know it's been the same for years. Maybe you just remember incorrectly; you might've dropped to silver before going on a hiatus with the game, lol.

[neonlol 0]

lmao

[vsb 6170]

7 hours ago, porkuspigus said:

since when did they changed to ELO-based threat system? since the last patch?

since forever basically 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

It has been 90% the same since like 2008. lol.

[Fortune Runner 796]

On 10/9/2019 at 2:02 AM, NotZombieBiscuit said:

It has been 90% the same since like 2008. lol.

whats the other 10 percent?

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

58 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

whats the other 10 percent?

Glicko 1 to Glicko 2

Old levels to new colours

Adding green bracket

removing number

Adjustment to bell curve

etc

etc

etc

Edited October 10, 2019 by NotZombieBiscuit

[Noob_Guardian 417]

threat system used to be based off of w/l ratio and had top 10%, it was changed to top 20% and then changed to the current point system

 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

23 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

threat system used to be based off of w/l ratio and had top 10%, it was changed to top 20% and then changed to the current point system

 

What. No. Old threat was winners go up. Losers go down. Simple as that. It was how you could carry idiots to gold on your team.

[Noob_Guardian 417]

14 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

What. No. Old threat was winners go up. Losers go down. Simple as that. It was how you could carry idiots to gold on your team.

uh, like i said, win loss ratio. You win a lot, threat goes up, lose a lot threat goes down threat level was averaged around a 50 match basis. The current system likely follows a similar 50 game system as well to determine threat. It's also why it can take days to dethreat depending on how many missions and how well/bad you do.

 

If you won a majority of your matches and ranked at a certain "ratio" you were a higher threat, than losing a bunch.

 

Litterally "winners go up losers go down". Only difference is i'm speaking of the algorithm behind.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Noob_Guardian

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

16 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

uh, like i said, win loss ratio. You win a lot, threat goes up, lose a lot threat goes down threat level was averaged around a 50 match basis. The current system likely follows a similar 50 game system as well to determine threat. It's also why it can take days to dethreat depending on how many missions and how well/bad you do.

 

If you won a majority of your matches and ranked at a certain "ratio" you were a higher threat, than losing a bunch.

 

Litterally "winners go up losers go down". Only difference is i'm speaking of the algorithm behind.

Has nothing to do with the ratio. Just directly wins and losses. People with the same win/loss ratio can have different threats due to the amount being gained on a win or loss is determined by your current standing and the standing of your opponent.

[Hexerin 1140]

I miss the original threat system. Simple 15 levels, winning pushed you up a level and losing pushed you down a level. Top level caused you to be announced to the district when you entered. Simple, efficient, and rewarded actually trying to win. Also had better matchmaking back then, but districts were also 50v50 and basically always full on both sides.

[VanilleKeks 734]

Aren't you that guy who uses civil lookalike cars with your remote det?

 

You're always gold to me.

[Noob_Guardian 417]

4 hours ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

Has nothing to do with the ratio. Just directly wins and losses. People with the same win/loss ratio can have different threats due to the amount being gained on a win or loss is determined by your current standing and the standing of your opponent.

Which system you talking about? 2013 G1 system was win/loss ratio (Revo and them literally stated this). How would you know win/loss ratio was different? We aren't talking RTW leaderboards are we?

The G1 system up until they changed it to the current point system was win/loss ratio. It was averaged around ~50 matches. What standing are you talking about? You mean the threat level between you and your opp? How's that have to do with just directly wins and losses? If it was simply wins and losses, standing between your opp and you wouldn't have an effect :X

 

The current system is a point system. Even if you lose a match in this current system, you can still gain threat, and if you win a match, you can still lose threat. Simply because of how the system works with points, as you want to do better point wise than the lower 50% to gain threat. However winning gives more points than losing so it's easier to lose threat if losing than winning.

 

2 hours ago, Hexerin said:

I miss the original threat system. Simple 15 levels, winning pushed you up a level and losing pushed you down a level. Top level caused you to be announced to the district when you entered. Simple, efficient, and rewarded actually trying to win. Also had better matchmaking back then, but districts were also 50v50 and basically always full on both sides.

Until you realized how trashy it was for every person to run, glitch items into walls, and exploit everything to get there. Districts were always full on both sides because we had more pop and there was no threat seg. Even at the initial threat seg, gold was pretty full as was silver, simply because of pop levels.

17 minutes ago, VanilleKeks said:

Aren't you that guy who uses civil lookalike cars with your remote det?

 

You're always gold to me.

Yes, I love my taxi broadwing unless you're talking about hex, ive never seen his/her car.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Noob_Guardian

[Hexerin 1140]

22 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Until you realized how trashy it was for every person to run, glitch items into walls, and exploit everything to get there.

None of those things have anything to do with the threat system, and thus renders that statement irrelevant.

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

34 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Which system you talking about? 2013 G1 system was win/loss ratio (Revo and them literally stated this). How would you know win/loss ratio was different? We aren't talking RTW leaderboards are we?

The G1 system up until they changed it to the current point system was win/loss ratio. It was averaged around ~50 matches. What standing are you talking about? You mean the threat level between you and your opp? How's that have to do with just directly wins and losses? If it was simply wins and losses, standing between your opp and you wouldn't have an effect :X

 

Old G1/RTW system.

 

Because mathematically direct wins/losses compared to win/loss ratio is not the same. Similar to how average and upper/lower 50% are not the same mathematically. You'll gain an amount of threat based on a bunch of factors when you win such as your current threat and their current threat as well as some other factors.

[Revoluzzer 274]

21 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

uh, like i said, win loss ratio. You win a lot, threat goes up, lose a lot threat goes down threat level was averaged around a 50 match basis. The current system likely follows a similar 50 game system as well to determine threat. It's also why it can take days to dethreat depending on how many missions and how well/bad you do.

Afaik it is not based on any recent matches. Not 10, not 50, not 100.

 

As you play the system tries to figure out what performance it can expect from you. That means for each mission it estimates how many points you will achieve - or rather, how many points you will achieve relative to the other players in the mission. If your result is close to the estimate your confidence value (CV) will increase. This confidence system defines how much your threat level can and/or does change after a mission.

With a high confidence value your threat level will change very little if you miss the system's estimate by a long shot. Instead the CV will take the brunt of the hit. This is the reason why de-threating usually takes a while to show effect, but then works quite rapidly. Fortunately it works rapidly in both directions then, because once your CV is low it will take a while to build up again.

 

 

51 minutes ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Which system you talking about? 2013 G1 system was win/loss ratio (Revo and them literally stated this). How would you know win/loss ratio was different? We aren't talking RTW leaderboards are we?

It's a shame the old blogs were taken down. But "Settle the Score" was apparently introduced in April 2013. So up to that point it was based on wins and losses. Another article here.

Edited October 11, 2019 by Revoluzzer
fixing links

[vsb 6170]

6 hours ago, Hexerin said:

I miss the original threat system. Simple 15 levels, winning pushed you up a level and losing pushed you down a level. Top level caused you to be announced to the district when you entered. Simple, efficient, and rewarded actually trying to win. Also had better matchmaking back then, but districts were also 50v50 and basically always full on both sides.

sounds heavily exploitable 

[Hexerin 1140]

24 minutes ago, Solamente said:

sounds heavily exploitable 

No different to our current system, or any other system.

[vsb 6170]

7 minutes ago, Hexerin said:

No different to our current system, or any other system.

the current system doesnt allow you to dethreat, farm low tier players all mission, and then let them win to remain at the lowest possible threat level as long as you want

 

just because other systems can be exploited doesnt mean we should ignore how easy it is to actually perform those exploits 

[Noob_Guardian 417]

4 hours ago, Hexerin said:

None of those things have anything to do with the threat system, and thus renders that statement irrelevant.

". Simple, efficient, and rewarded actually trying to win."

 

uh, it had to do with that section. The system got changed because of it being easily exploitable and abusable and encouraged bad and unfair gameplay.

 

4 hours ago, Revoluzzer said:

Afaik it is not based on any recent matches. Not 10, not 50, not 100.

 

As you play the system tries to figure out what performance it can expect from you. That means for each mission it estimates how many points you will achieve - or rather, how many points you will achieve relative to the other players in the mission. If your result is close to the estimate your confidence value (CV) will increase. This confidence system defines how much your threat level can and/or does change after a mission.

With a high confidence value your threat level will change very little if you miss the system's estimate by a long shot. Instead the CV will take the brunt of the hit. This is the reason why de-threating usually takes a while to show effect, but then works quite rapidly. Fortunately it works rapidly in both directions then, because once your CV is low it will take a while to build up again.

 

 

It's a shame the old blogs were taken down. But "Settle the Score" was apparently introduced in April 2013. So up to that point it was based on wins and losses. Another article here.

The old team had mentioned in a post that it averaged threat around ~50 matches this was not a blog post, but an actual comment in a forum post. You're threat "always" changes, and it has to have a baseline to go by and read the statistical average from. Where do you think the CV stat baselines are and how it determines if it increased enough to threat up to silver from bronze You can't have CV determine threat with certain CV baselines, and not have the average "cv/point gain/loss" over X time (well... you can but that's not how the system works). The X time is the average over X missions. It's not simply "score high get cv, score low lose cv". (That's a gross oversimplification of the system) It's "score high/score low to change the overall "average" CV enough that was netted over x amount of missions". Your "cv" IS an average.

 

Otherwise it would be piss easy to dethreat over a small number of missions by scoring really low.

 

The average is the average of how well you did over like 50 missions, which is why it can take days to dethreat.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Noob_Guardian

[VanilleKeks 734]

12 hours ago, Noob_Guardian said:

Yes, I love my taxi broadwing unless you're talking about hex, ive never seen his/her car.

I just remember porkuspigus using three different civ cars in the same mission, to try and blow me up. Such commitment I can't but not appreciate.

[vsb 6170]

3 minutes ago, VanilleKeks said:

to try and blow me up

pick the trapsetter subclass they said its totally viable they said